The Sun. — London, England, 1836-03-30 00:00:00

Sir ER - riot b e T PEEL —Wh et h er Mr. Daniel has or has true been appointed m ayor, I will not pretend to say ; but Ik_leit vv is ot that he i s a gentleman who is far advanced in years. a groundn Sir, until n ow , t h at the Noble Lord had made age toriieof can exclusi on ; b ut if he had applied such a principle all j C ase cf Mr. D an i el—to the case rather of Bristol— other 4 ' l Y is, that in the instance of Rochester and many toiltetut2totiveysns I could enumerate, he has not considered tke ages as any reason why they ought to he triluded from 4 llucre agistAc Y — (Cheers.) I conceive the cases to which I a cted onaulPlY sufficient to show that the Noble Lord has not iirtievtion the principle which he now states ; but it is not my to ca l l on to condemn the acts of the Noble Lord, but only Whi ch he him for some explanation as to the principles Pal 1711adielrethe has proceeded in the nomination of the magistrates new corporations. With these observationa,, SIT., I any -2 1 ; 6 ' 1 de, saying only, that if the Noble Lord. tan give .oh vvhich will be satisfactory 'to the liouse, the 1 ,4 t which I have in view will be more than `answered, as I ink Inch charges as I hive brought again ;t him had much Migh e made h ere than elsewhere, whe•ce the Noble Lord hon. Bat an opportunity of answerin Lor g them. The Right d o net resum e d his seat amidst loud cheering. th e R ; RUSSELL said he '4ertainly would much rather consicerationH of igut Gentleman Irought the subject under th e lqa on. the Ho•:,se, than that the charge, conveying iieliputation on his Itlajesty's Government for the manner in Corp o th;cY on sr.:iected magistrates under the Municipal tuttityraot!'°:as kt should be made where he had no oppor at all, • g 4vi 'dg an explanation, and where, if it were made doubt n'•ust be for the purpose of laisina• suspicion and jea nr to the p ropr i ety of the course which his Mo tion es , - ', ove rnment had pu rsue d. Wi t h regar d to th i s ques hy t' `ne appointm ent o f mag i strates, it would be recollected Q .O o4le House, that th e fi rst Bill i ntroduced on the subject of ula.rations provid e d, i n con f orm i ty, as he and his colleagues n ot with the pri nc ipl e o f t h e report o f the Commissioners, Tip al ert ainly that a port i on of the Councillors of these muni . tw o bor oughs should themselves be the justices, but that the give Powers should be t o t a lly di s j o i nte d ; and i n order to peti• co nfidence to the inhabitants of the towns in the ad esa in tra tion o f justice, that the persons nominated to be be' t the c omm i ss i on of the peace should be persons who had ci rpreviouslv r ecommen d ed b y the Town-council. That prin %Po uP to the end of the discussions which then took place, he , i _.u r ght the most favourable to govern the nomination of the ma aeoZleaitiesa.aShubsequently it was though h t preferable that the Town rnetver of Should be consulted, and t ere was left to them the th; Siselection, giving to the Crown the power of rej.ect ll nomination which was thought objectionable. When t r , was last in the House, when the amendments of the ata",rma Were last discussed, it would be remembered that he - L ecl . in conformity with vt hat he understood, and with what sta,"4 u nderstood by f r i en d s an d co ll eagues of his had been th e ' e ," in anoth er : p l ace b y t h ose w h o framed and supported after "Inen dment, that it w ou ld b e as com p e t en t to t h e C rown, elo amendment was carried, to take the advice and opi to tak e the Town Councils, as was for the Lord Chancellor 0. 1 e the opinion of the Lords Lieutenant of counties._ of 'TY, hear.) It was partly on the faith of that declaration vi r ,,, 4 thot a great majority. of this House, who thought the r st i: e uf the Bill had been a good deal impaired by the altc thar''s--(Cheers)—consented to adopt those amendments, cla,-.raajority expecting that in the beginning, at least, the he e - „" e would be acted on in the spirit of the clause as it had their tent up to the Lords, and not as it had been amended by „kto rdships.—(Hear, hear.) Holding to the opinion on thea"Y expressed by his Majesty's Ministers, and holding to o tt tlpinion of the House of Commons which passed the Bill e , th e faith of the declaration of Ministers, he thought it n>,e3ary to direct the Under Secretary of State for the clac Depart men t t o wr i te , i n t h e month of October, a cir thairt for a copy of whi c h th e present mot i on was made. In lift e cir cular the Under Se cre t ary o f t h e H ome Department, o er c r statin g t h e var i ous regulations which were to be ob tisine4 with a view to the carrying into effect of the pro hans,f the A c t, sa id—" I am lik ew i se authorised to request seco2vill make it known to the new Town-councils that any h ai r endation whi c h th e y n!ay . think fit to make of persons t ie w e e d to serve in the commissio n o f th e peace, will have its 1 6 4 . 'gilt with the advisers of th e C rown ." He directed op e ', t erms to be us e d, b ecause h e thought, while on the 'ca' h and they invited the Town -councils to do that which whilacit strictly within the letter of the Act of Parliament-- 1 4h e they invited the Town -councils to recommend persons ,„: Were fit to be magistrates, they at the same time would to g s r te to the Crown the whole right and power of consider. ki s „ tu° se recommendations, and of determining whether the t ea ,„l lB so recommended were individuals who were fit to be mendedto t hm . to his Majesty for the administration of justice to the various local districts. Having acted, as he conceived, and %spirit both of the Bill as it was originally introduced tle e l a the int en ti ons o f hi s M a j esty ' s Mi n i sters as they were cot red, he wrote for those recommendations to be made, 1 14"; L es it h a d b een most a b surdly asserted by some, who must JeQQ' c eil very careless in the inquiries they made on the sub tot I ,, b , ° t after knowing the result of th e mun i c i pa l elections— hear ;\gildthe Town-councils were flu s h e d w ith v i ctory — ( H ear, kii,;,'"--but wh en h e must h ave b een tota ll y i gnorant of what ttZt be t h e f ate of the elect i ons, and whether the great and li e ,"' l lehnin g ma j or i ty m i g h t not b e o f w h at the Right I tßaronet called the Conservative party.—(Cheers.) at that ti me h e pledged himself that due considera teoubsuould b e given to the recommendations of the Town ad bTherefore, any representations of th e ki n d th at j e ett countenanced by an address b e i ng moved in the 4 t e ll , e et' Lords for any c i rcu l ar l etter sent from the Home this otal nu this subject in January last, that was founded oi! a Al ui srepresentation and perve rs i on o f t h e con d uct w h ic h kla';,ajesty' s G overnment t h oug h t f i t to pursue, and, he must deep that such a m i srepresentat i on an d perversion might have 41 'oided si m ply by t h e care o f l oo ki ng i nto t h e London titteatuatry newspapers of the time to ascertain the date of the 11ie: 41 %--( Cheering.) W e ll, th en , t h e per i o d h av i ng arr i ved tlie; these e l ect i ous h a d ta k en place, the Town Councils of t k 4r ious boroughs began to consider as to the recoramenda- S e W hich they would make to the Crown. So soon as th ende of these recommendations had arrived, it struck him ' gr ebes of the individuals selected and recommended by ti eas t it° svn Councils for magistrates being very dispropor k, e, that he might adopt some rule as to them which would :411 44 , a guide. He, therefore, sent for Mr. Blackburne, who h ir lteth `ed as the chief of the Commission, and asked him e llta - „ e :' in his opinion, it was right to fix any limit to the ,;( 1 4ti to be recommended ? Mr. Blackburne told him POpwa thought it right to have a scale according to the tl tt -sti ens of the different towns. He would not, how her:tivise suc h a sca l e to b e strictly and invariably via d to, but it might be adopted rather with bto their convenience —( Opposition cheers),—in e number which might be fit for an y p ar ti cu l ar town . he was that in general a certain /number should not li ce eded. H e wou ld now s h ow t h e House the nature and. Se nse of the recomnendation of Mr. Blackburne. He sn o „ occasion to consider the . representations receiv e d dread , t he se a - port towns. In those representations it was iliac:Qat several of the persons recommended were for . a 'til aad 'a time absent from the town, and as they could not, like Z 4 lit' re P!aces, have the continued services of persons in cen t! the s h i cience with them, if a fixed number had been adopted ell e ,;` ° rne-office, they expressed a hope that there would as given to them a larger number of magistrates than:was u sually.—( Cheers.) He thought that a very valid . h.. 4 ie ll ' i s - C( Hear har Now, with respect to the places 11 ( 1 , qc Hon. ) Gentleman had fixed on es the sub -1,;41(5h`"s ob ' s ' er t i;ations; the . first was . Guildford, and there he r ecommendation included nine Tories and three his Majesty's . Government had contrived to alter s t 'ese Pertion by selecting the three Whigs and only . one g', h ch rv h ati ? This statement proved to him the difficulty, -l ted Honourable Gentleman had himself sug llttrt;„ cf et,.;„'' of politics upon a • 1 / 4 41, ---g a particular designation tPery:in. He would give an instance of this diffi h;„_his pe did not see the Honourable Member for Exeter th a r,acc, but he was sure, as far as concerned o a '' t e ca - c ! e e would not dispute single t he was going to state. th ey of t „." 1 Exeter was not a single instance, but . was one Wit e, v -ea tY or thirty. He was informed by his friends o, Ith`` th at "eM he had several, being intimately connected the the neighbourhood, bourhood, th a t th ere were some -persons soy s ver ;;Y want e d to b e nom i nated by the town-council, but wh o rejected ; but they said there were one or two i per- c ti ger ti:11 their politics were so violent . against everyt ling if c ' i dep n would be a great mortification, and a source of t o k t hey %lc di ssatisfaction to the whole of the . Liberal . party, e ed r e selected by the Crown as individuals to be he tie lu th e the these c ommission of the peace. Now with respect to tolthre„ , n ames—there were about two, or there might i et er ; --- t,„ ° , 4l :ing had occasion to ask the Hon. Member for '` he thought of the recommendation of the town as 1, t a i h e e xen had been told it contained some names that u s ' li st `e ,tingly obnoxious, and that altogether it was not a h •' e er e si ;--th e H on. Gentleman took him into the lobby, and Qas him a private letter he had received, in which 1,4,' f air rasa that in the opinion of his friends the list ili a - ° no, and there the person whom the Whig and , 11 tl, ca larty ti , (town designated so . particularly obnoxious was ;IOiu„ eel 1 4 , •cis R he amongst the Whigs, while the Conservatives, th at ra .htY, had given him to their opponents. This tc ,sca to it was not safe to say that an individual be -41'1.4 to _ea particular party, and was disqualified on that ac thtoir ta _d es t in the commission of the peace. lie was sure that 1 11 _4 gaand designations depended more on the opinions of tt4laseiveus ve them than on the sentiments of the individuals th!th4!e W I : Be frequently saw one whom he could call a mo eal..ng described by the Conservatives as a decided Nile...44'V by the Radicals as a no less decided Conserva ilein 4° oo In the case of Guildford there were several It4,eratesel4v,who wished some individuals to be nominated ma -I,'vas ear " had not been recommended by the town council. li e c h h ric stlY desired that he should recommend to the e ar Qli evou ° Persons in particular, of the highest respectability khij.d to t hem to be, and if they had been appointed he kt Ity s that they would have discharged their duty with aOelk ko, ( ktt o to ?! did not doubt their qualifications, but he refused b y :ntuesee in the proposal, because out of the twelve 11 , 1, 1 qualien town council he found four who were perfectly ka tt 'ral p e for the office. He was told, on inquiring of al,. the t z i * "es, that of the four named two were Reformers, th r ie h the Ric were moderate Tories. That was the case in ce aithin.“-ight Honourable Gentleman said he had named k1 e1441 111 and one Conservative.—( Hear, hear.) He might aeritely statedeteinsances of this kind till midnight, but he had bone enough to show that in their attempts to fix the ta, l 4 madlefparty, it was not safe to rely on the representa tdo,reeeir'_ .3' adversaries. Relying on the representations he tieina, lie believed that he had selected two on each ts tr so 1 1 ,,,, n 11 0 doubt they were all respectable men, but if tht passed that amongst the others there were some who a l y w ere s:." pver because they were attorneys, or because him h i n timatel y connected with the political elections of ola u--(Opposition cheers.) That cheer reminded ''Rh e should tad t _ state here, that it had been his rule, as the to e.,..°2,'• Gentleman said, generally to exclude attorneys "'lutist brewers. There were two reasons why he ex- eluded attorneys—one was that they usually had a great num ber of clients amongst the inhabitants of the boroegle and therefore they were liable to more suspielbn; the other rea son was, that they were efteit the conductors and managers of all the political detttans of the town. With respect to that rules Met aeparted from it in several large instances, but as tilsgaidecl the appointment of attorneys who were at the head of a political party, he knew of only two instrlileeta iqt:Ch he had departed from it. One was in, thtN:itk.K of Chichester, the individual having been ti;s66tiq4iiiied by the Noble Lord who always spoke .air,aing the Government. The other case was that cif heiager. The person appointed there was re torenTendea by another Noble Lord who always voted against tovernment.—( Hear, he ar .) P er h aps some wttil'd say Itilat he went too far in appointing those gentieilin—(Hear)--. but he did so only on receiving tht `strongest testimony as to their respectability. He believed the representations of those Noble Lords; he was sure they would state nothing but %Oat the.? believed to be strictly true ; but in makief `Zeiception tti that kind in favour of a person se rehestly opposed to the Government in politics, he seedy afforded something like a proof that they had net Settled this arrangement for the ap pointment of then magistrates, with a view to serve any poli tical views or his own. The view which he took with respect to the political opinion of the majority was, that he ought cer tainly, in general, to attend to the recommendation of the town-councils ; but when, owing to the council being equally deceived, they had no opportunity of making a particular re commendation, or when, from affection, or for any other rea son, the council had named only those who were of their own particular party, he felt that he ought to endeavour to place on the commission persons of different political principles.— ( Hear, hear.) He had acted on that principle with regard to Liverpool ; he then advised the Crown to put into the commission , five gentlemen who were recommended to him, and who were described as individuals who were not of what were called Liberal principles. In the case of Hull, a long list was recommended to him, which did not con tain one person of Tory politics. He appointed here two gentlemen, who, as he was told, were certainly moderate in their views, but they were decidedly Conservative. In the Leeds list there was only one gentleman whose politics were Tory ; he added to that one three others. To the list from Newcastle-on-Tyne he added the late mayor, a person, he believed, of great respectability. He put in also two others who were not in the former list. There were certainly some cases in which all the magistrates appointed belonged to one party, there being no individuals of the other party named by the town-councils, and he not having been able to select any others ; but he believed that in all instances the individuals were of great respectability, and fully qualified for the duties which would devolve on them. With regard to the places named by the Right Hon. Baronet, there was also Wigan. Having received a remonstrance as to the manner in which the list from that town was composed, he sought particular infor mation as to each of the individuals, and being assured of their respectability he did not feel himself justified in rejecting them. He, however, desired inquiries to be 'made with respect to some other gentlemen who were named to him as parties whom it was desired to see appointed. As regarded Rochester, he received the recommendation of a large body of persons sup ported by one of the Members of the town and one of the Members of the county, who assured him of their respectabi lity.—(Hear from the Opposition, responded to by cries of Hear from the Ministerial benches.) This was a case in which the town council, being divided, had made no recommenda tion whatever. Therefore he thought himself fully at liberty to recommend to the Crown persons who were per fectly qualified to keep the peace, and to administer justice in that borough. If the time should come when the town council would be able to act, he should be ready to attend-to any recommendations which they might forward. • The Right Hon. Baronet said that in Coventry the magistrates were all of one mind on political subjects. One of the Mein* hers for Coventry came to him at the Home-office, and said he believed that the persons named were all fit individuals to be in the commission of the peace ; but, with respect to the last three or four on the list, as to their being men who entertained liberal political opinions, he could assure him that they were not. They did not, at all events, vote for that Hon. Gentle man ; the Hon. Gentleman told him that they had voted against him, and in favour of the Tory candidate. If, then, they did not vote for the Hon. Gentleman, and voted only for his Right Hon. Friend, it was evident they desired to keep open one of the seats, - to allow one gentleman of the politics of the Right Hon. Baronet to be returned as Representative for Coventry. Let him not be told, then, that these indivi duals were violent partisans.—( Hear.) Let him not be told that they were exceedingly liberal in their politics, when, there being two candidates in the field, two who were supporters of Ministers, and two who were supporters of the Right Honour able Gentleman, they did not vote for the two supporters of Ministers, but, having given one vote on one side, neutralized it by giving another vote on the other side. They might be liberal men—they might be very good men as politicians, but surely they were not such violent or ardent partisans that they ought to be excluded from serving as justices of the peace.— ( Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet made a complaint of the appointment of Magistrates for Leicester, but (so we understood the Noble Lord, but he spoke in a very low tone of voice) they were not all of the same politics. Then, as re garded Plymouth, he knew nearly all those gentlemen, and they were, all of them, with the exception of Mr. Woodford, supporters of his, and decidedly liberal in their politics. He was perfectly satisfied as to their respectability, and knew that they were fully qualified for the duties intrusted to them. Sir R. PEEL said he did not question the respectability of any of those Gentlemen.—( Hear, hear.) Lord JOHN RUSSELL said it appeared to him that was the question.--(Hear, hear.) They were all respectable men ; he had made inquiries and satisfied himself that they were so, and the Right Hon. Baronet now declared that he did not raise a question on that subject ; their respectability, therefore, was to be taken for granted. He was not prepared to say that the magistrates of the towns, any more than the magistrates of the counties, should be all of one side in poli tics; on the contrary, he should say that it was better that they should not be : but, at the same time, having declared that he would give great weight to those recommendations of the Town Councils, having admitted they were competent to recommend, he could not set himself up as a superior judge, and say—" It is true you have recommended respectable men, I know them myself, and I know that justice will be safe in their hands ; I know that no political bias will tempt them to swerve from the line of their duty ; I know that they will be just, though in being so they must act against their political inclinations ; still lam not satisfied, and I ask the Town Coun- cil to give me men of different opinions, and you must choose between Tory, Whig, and Radical, so as to furnish me with a fair compound of the whole." If he had addressed that to those Town Councils he should have been calling on them to act on a principle which would have been found impracticable. If he had attempted the task himself, he should have been unable to give satisfaction ; for very many of those who had been mentioned, and whom he had put into the commission as Conservatives, he was told were Liberals, or, in other words, not Conservatives at all. He, therefore, did not think that, as a general principle, the advisers of the Crown should look very scrupulously to ascertain in what way each individual voted at an election. If he did so, he did not know that the should get any security there.—( Hear, hear.) He was sure of this, that even amongst the representatives of the people they had professors of exceedingly liberal opinions —(a laugh and cheers)_ -who were not found in this House acting as the great majority o f th e Lib era l party acted —( cheers ) — and might there not be in the constituency many men of the same sort as were to be found amongst the representatives? Might he not discover that he had made a great mistake if he set a man down as belonging to one party or another, merely because he had given a vote on some occasion, or had taken a part in some local contest—might he not commit a great blunder if he put down such a man as entertaining strong political opi nions, or as having a decided political bias ?—( Hear, hear.) The last case mentioned by the hight Honourable Gentleman was, he believed, that of the brewers. The first time he ob- jected to a brewer was in the case of Portsmouth, and he got thereupon a letter front an Honourable Friend of his, the Member for Portsmouth, stating at great length the reasons why he thought it wrong, after the pledge he had given to make a man being a brewer a ground of exclusion in a case in which the town council had thought fit to recommend him, and perhaps had declared why they would place more confidence in him as a Justice of the Peace, than in any other man. With respect to Portsmouth, he put a brewer in there, after he was satisfied by the representations made to him, that this was not one of the cases in which he should be justified i►► enforcing the prin ciple of exclusion. There was another case, in which the Noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn, who always voted against the Government, asked him the grounds of the exclu sion of brewers ? He replied, that though he should generally hold that they were disqualified, yet in such a case as that of King's Lynn, where they possessed the greatest property, and were the leading persons of the place, there he did not think it right to enforce the rule and exclude them. He acted on the principle as regarded brewers, that he applied to the case of attorneys. When he received from any one, whatever might be his party, strong recommendations of an individual, assuring him that he was a person who was looked up to by all parties, and as happened in many cases, that he had been 20 or 25 years already in the commission of the peace, in such cases he relaxed the rule both with regard to brewers and attorneys. He came now to Bristol, and there the Right Hon. Baronet said an agreement was come to by which one of the parties chose twelve, and the other chose twelve. He was not aware of any such agreement ; he was never informed of it. He certainly did receive a great number of letters respecting the appointment of Magistrates for Bristol, but none of them stated that fact.—( Hear.) Of course, any person in his situation, as well as any person in the situation of a lord lieutenant, when any person was recommended as a magistrate, must go to some one or other in whom confidence was placed, to con sult them as to the individual in question. And the Right Hon. Baronet would think it strange, no doubt, if he went and took the opinion of a person with whom he was not acquainted, or in whom he had not confidence. The conclusion to which he came upon the information he received with regard to Bris tol was that there were many of the persons recommended holding Conservative opinions who were proper individuals to be placed in the commission of the peace ; b ut t h at aga i ns t others there were reasons which were entitled to considerable weight. It would be disagreeable, it would be invidious, were he, with respect to Bristol, and in other cases, to state the circumstances affecting the individuals which' induced him to pass over their names.—( Hear, hear.) He could not do so without entering into particulars with respect to those of Libe ral as well as Conservative politics, which, though they would reflect no dishonour or disgrace on the parties, would nevertheless, not prove a fit subject for public discussion— ( Hear, hear, hear.) But as the Right Honourable Gentle man had mentioned, in particular, the case of Mr. John Da niel, he begged to lie allowed to say a word in explanatio n of that matter. He had been informed that Mr. Daniel had on several occasions, publicly declared that, at his present age, he found himself unequal to the conduct of public business, his memoay having so greatly failed him that he could no THE SUN, LONDON, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 30, it,36 longer rely upon it That appeared to hint to be a sufficient kor, not including. Mr, Daniel in the arrangement which was to b e ma d e . His wish was, to appoint perions who were able to undertake practieally t clUties of a 'Justice of the Peace.; be therefore did net think it advisable to put ipto,tb e pArtlthilarly when he had a choice of ,twenty-foqr, a gentleman who, perhaps, in the course of three or four years, would be quite unable to perform the ma gisterial duties of so important a district.—( Hear.) Such were his reasons for the course he had taken with respect to the places to which the Right Hon. Baronet had alluded. It was a source of great satisfaction to him, that there were qnly tight towns that were made the subjedt of complaint; the number of Magistrates appointed; acctirdiilg tO the ac count presented to Parliaffient, behi not lets than 428 ; and there having bben atipointed since, as many as 200 or 250 morn. AO Would not pretend to say that there had Adt been any persons omitted who ought to have been placed in the commission, or that there might not have been some individuals appointed who had not the discretion, judgment, and character which entitled them to such a posi tion ; but he could say, he did believe that, on the whole, this list of, perhaps, 600 and more magistrates was a list of re spectable and intelligent men. It was certainly a list of which the majority entertained liberal politics, but he believed them to be individuals who would not allow their politics to prevent them from doing their duty as justices.—( Hear, hear.) He would not say a word in disparagement of the Magistrates of counties, or of the manner in which the Lords Lieutenant of counties had exercised their discretion. He entertained a high opinion of the county Magistrates, and thought that the dis cretionary power was not altogether ill placed in the Lords Lieutenant ; but he would again say he did believe that the Magistrates of the towns would be found as intelligent and as able, well and honestly to administer justice as the county Ma gistrates were known to be.—( Cheers.) And he was far from thinking that any thing which the Right Hon. Baronet had stated in the course of his speech had shown that there had existed on the part of the advisers of the Crown the least dis position to sacrifice the ends of justice for the sake of the views of party.—( Great cheering.) Sir R. VYVVAN said that the Noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department had risen for the purpose of replying to the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. How had the. Noble Lord replied to the allegations and the arguments of his Right Honourable Friend ?—(Great cheering.) Many points had been alluded to by the Right Hon. Baronet to which the Noble Lord had, it seemed, felt it unnecessary even to advert.—(Loud cheer ing.) He bad not touched upon the case of Leicester.— ( Lord Jnhn Russell—Yes, I did.) The Noble Lord had just mentioned it, and passed it over with the most becoming deli cacy.—(Cheers.) What was the explanation of the Noble Lord with respect to Bristol ?—( Great cheering.) The case of Bristol was the strongest that had been alluded to that evening; and he felt assured that neither the House nor the country would feel satisfied with the explanation which the Noble Lord had given.—( Cheers.) He was sure that the Noble Lord had stated nothing to satisfy them why a Gentle man of the greatest respectability should be set aside in order to make way for some person of opposite political opinions. —( Cheering.) He had hoped that when the Noble Lord had stated that he had made that sweeping recommendation to the Crown, with respect to the appointment of Magis trates, that the Noble Lord would have been able to show that in this respect, at least, he and his colleagues had lain aside that spirit of party, which—most unhappily for the country —had too long prevailed in that House.—(Great and continued cheering from the Opposition side of the House.) When the Noble Lord rose to defend his conduct, he ex pected that he would have taken larger and more extensive grounds, and that he would not have shrunk for a defence Into the circumstance, that in one place or another some Conser vatives had been appointed. He had listened with attention to the speech of the Noble Lord, and he did not appear to him to have answered the allegations, in any respect, which had been made against the conduct pursued by the Home- Office in the appointment of magistrates.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord stated that, in regulating the number :of magi strates, they had been influenced by a consideration of the ex tent of the population of the place where the magistrates were to exercise their functions. Now, how had the Government followed out this principle which they declared they had been guided by ?—( Hear, hear.) In Bath they had appointed six teen magistrates to a population of fifty thousand. In Bristol twenty-four was the number named byjthe Town Council, and eighteen was the number appointed by the Government to a population of a hundred and four thousand persons.—( Cheers.) Lord J. RUSSELL—The Hon. Baronet is mistaken as to Bath, as I think that the number of magistrates appointed to Bath was twelve. (Cheers.) He confessed himself disappcinted in the Noble Lord's defence of the appointments which lie had made.„-, (Hear.) :When it went forth to the country it was not likely to raiiejlio,Miniityra„of,the Crown in public estimation, or add td thB bf the Sol'rereian.,—, (janua cheers.) Mr. ]#ERNAL aid not exf&t frthii len'ittetQ.Aq planner which the discussion had opened to find it lat.t.ri o t iNe tone which the Hon. Member for Bristol had adopted-2 ( Hear, hear.) If that Hon. Member entertained the opinion which he had expressed with regard to the Noble Lord, it was his distinct duty to come forth and impeach him.— ( Cheers.) When a man of integrity and ability, such as the Hon. Baronet ; mid representing a population of upwards of 4ueli at. He, attributed, Oorttipt tnotivo td a Minister he was bound In liiiribuf and in dtity td follovt tip the cbarge.—( Loud cheers.) He (Mr. IJernal) withe'd they had not been drawn away from the subject by this disdlisSidn, for he could not call it debate. As regarded Rochester his Noble Friend should be thoroughly acquitted, for if any blame lay with respect to the appointments there it rested upon him (Mr. Bernal) ; and yet the utmost that he did was to attend a deputation which waited upon Government to re commend certain persons as qualified for the magistracy. The circumstances of the town warranted this application. The parties in the Corporation were equally balanced, and the con sequence was they could not agree in their recommendations. Even to this day they had not agreed as to the election of a mayor or aldermen. The Noble Lord had done nothing with regard to those appointments of which he need be ashamed ; and if he (Mr. Bernal) were to-morrow placed in the same position he should act the same part.—( Ministerial cheers.) Mr. G 0 ULB URN always maintained that the maintenance of particular political opinions should not exclude any person from holding the commission of the peace; and he only now de sired that a difference of opinion from what predominated in the Government should not be deemed an insuperable bar to the magisterial office.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear," from the Opposition, loudly echoes' by Mr. O'Connell.) The Go• vernment which consulted party politics in those appoint ments certainly did not do their duty. His Hon. Friend who had last ,addressed the House said that representatives had a right to recommend to those appointments. • No doubt the recommendations made by his Hon. Friend were honestly and conscientiously made; but, however strong his (Mr. Goulburn's) impression of the fairness of his Hon. Friend's motives might be, those who were not so well acquainted with him, and who knew the political opinions which he entertained, might be apt to look upon his recommendation with suspicion. This must be particularly the case as regarded Rochester, . where opinions were so equally balanced.—( Cheers.) He did not object to his Hon. Friend's interference, but he did object to the acquiescence of Ministers, who, on so delicate a point, should have resorted to sources of information more free from the suspicion which must be attached to such a recommenda tion by all who had not the pleasure of knowing his Hon. Friend as well as he.—( Cheers.) He would conclude by stating it as his opinion that the explanation of the Noble Lord was by no means satisfactory. Lord J. RUSSELL explained. With respect to the ob servations of the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Vyvyan) he (Lord J. Russell) expected to hear some motive urged for the accusa tion brought against him as a Minister of the Crown. I can not (continued the Noble 'Lord) pretend to find fault with the expressions used by the Hon. Baronet. They are perfectly justifiable as used against a Minister of the. Crown ; but if I am to understand them as so used, I certainly shall impute it as a fault to the Hon. Baronet, and shall look upon his attack as a calumnious one, if he do not, without loss of time, after having accused me of corrupt practices, bring this question to an early decision.—(Loud cheers from the Ministerial benches.) lam ready to meet the charge—(Loud cheering) —and if it be not thus brought, I feel compelled to say that a charge of corruption against me is false and unfounded.— ( Protracted cheering.) Sir R. VYVYAN—I certainly do accuse as corrupt the Minister of the Crown whose conduct has been more or less calculated, in appointments to the magistracy, to advance the interests of his own party, rather than to advance the ends of justice.—(Cheers from both sides, and laughter from the Mi nisterial benches.) With respect to the words which I before used, I have only to say, that I meant them to apply in the full sense in which they were originally spoken. Mr. P. THOMSON was ready to admit the charge against the Noble Lord, if it only meant that in the appointments which the Noble Lord had recommended, he had studied the advancement of the great and important measures which, in truth and in justice, those on that side of the House thought it right to advocate. But if, on the other hand, as the words of the Hon. Baronet seemed to imply, it was imputed to the Noble Lord, to him (Mr. P. Thomson), and to others con nected with the Government, that in the appointment of ma gistrates they had been influenced by corrupt motives, the Hon. Baronet was bound either to declare that he had used the expressions in a moment of excitement, or else to follow out the charge by laying upon the table some motion founded upon it. As an honest Member of the House, that was the bounden duty of the Hon. Baronet.—( Ministerial cheers.) Only one of two ways were open to him. Unless he adopted one or the other way, very little care or attention would be paid to any charges made in future by the Hon. Baronet.— (Ministerial cheers.) The SPEAKER—The matter cannot rest without a clear understanding. As it appears to me it is this. I certainly heard the word corruption used by the Hon. Baronet the Member for Bristol, and I was then about to interfere ; but the language in which the phrase was followed up seemed to me to render interference unnecessary.,—( Hear, hear.) Still, however, a distinct charge has been made, which cannot be ex plained away by any generalities.—( Cheers frorn the Minis terial benches.) The charge was, that the Noble Lord, in his Ministerial capacity, had used the power vested in him thus for corrupt purposes as regarded appointments connected with the due administration of justice.—(Ministerial cheers.) [The cheers from the Ministerial benches,, together with the ac customed obstruction of the canopy, rendered it very diffi cult to hear with distinctness the opinion delivered by the Speaker.] Mr. HUiVIE felt that the charge made by the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Bristol, was a very extraordinary one. In lis opinion the Noble Lord had been only too attentive to his op ponents in the appointments which he had made. The Noble Lord had acted with the utmost impartiality in accepting the amendment from the other House, which vested the nomination of those recommended by the town council in the Crown, for he accepted it without knowing what would be the issue of the municipal elections. What, was this, then, the first time they had heard of party feeling in that House? After the observa tions made by the Hon. Baronet the Member for Bristol, he was bound to institute an inquiry immediately before the House.—( Hear.) Let the charge be brought forward. (An impeachment.) An impeachment if they pleased—so much the better. Let them have an impeachment—it would be a novel thing— Mr. GO ULB URN—Oh, but you forget the expense. Mr. HUME—Never mind the expense. I will undertake to get all the expense subscribed for.—( A laugh.) Oh, don't let Hon. Members opposite imagine thnt though inclined to deprecate needless expense, expense would ever prevent him from supporting every measure which he believed to be bene ficial, and this would be a beneficial step.—(" Hear," from the Opposition.) Yes, it would be a benefit, for it would be a practical illustration of the doctrine of Ministerial responsibi lity to the people, and he should be delighted to see the first impeachment brought by the Tories, if only for the sake of seeing it crushed, and witnessing it recoil upon themselves.— ( Cheers.) He trusted also that the Hon. Baronet, to prove his impartiality, would at the same time move for a list of the county magistrates, their political opinions, and the motives which influenced their appointment, and if the Hon. Baronet took half as much pains to inquire into this subject as he had done to inquire into the political opinions of the municipal magistrates, he was sure the country would be a gainer by the inquiry. Sir R. PEEL again explained that it was at the wish of tha Noble Lord opposite that this motion had been brought forward out of its turn, and that he had expressly asked, be fore he made it, if any Hon. Gentleman bad any objection to his so doing.—(l - lear.) Mr. G 0 ULB URN, in answer to an observation which had been made, begged to explain that when lie was Secretary for Ireland the Lord Chancellor was the person responsible for magisterial appointments, except those under the Police Acts ; and that with regard to the former he had invariably, though repeatedly applied to, refused to interfere in any way whatever. Mr. RIC El ARDS said the Hon. Baronet had preferred— he spoke advisedly—a well-founded charge. What was the argument used in favour of Municipal Reorm but this : that the whole course of justice had been perverted, that the Cor porations were corrupt, and their influence used for party pur poses? But how had the Noble Lord acted in order to pre serve the administration of justice from the interference of po litical and party feeling ? The Noble Lord admitted that he had consulted gentlemen who were of the same political party with himself, and consequently must have been actuated in the choice of magistrates for these boroughs by.party feeling, and these appointments were to a certain extent made for party purposes. In this sense he understood the charge of the Hon. Baronet of party corruption, and in this sense he repeated that charge, not only against the Noble Lord but against the whole party opposite. ( Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) He was glad to hear those cheers. He presumed he had said nothing that did not please them, and he did not think the worse of himself for it. He said he charged the whole party opposite with corruption. He did more, he charged them with conspiracy—(" Oh, oh, oh," from the Ministerial benches)—he charged them with a settled design to subvert the institutions of the country, and to change them from monar chial to republican. (" Oh," and " Hear, hear.") This seemed to be one of the objects of the Reform Bill, and that it was pne of the objects also of the Irish Reform Bill no one who had heard the debate of last night could for a mo ment doubt. That Bill would make fifty or sixty little re publics in Ireland. ( Question.) The Hon. Gentleman was proceeding to make some observations on the debate of the preceding night, when Mr. E WART rose to order, and said the . House was re sponsible to the public for the employment of their time, and this was a mere waste of it. Sir R. VYVYAN—The difference was no t essen ti a l, f or if the principle of regulating the number of magistrates by the extent of population were to be admitted, surely if they gave twelve magistrates to a population of fifty thousand they ought at least to have allowed twenty-four magistrates to a population of a hundred and four thousand.—(Loud cheer ing.) Independent of population, there were many other circumstances that entitled the city of Bristol to greater consideration. It had much more business than Bath—it was a great commercial town, and was besides a seaport, and a place of considerable importance.—(Hear, hear.) The conduct of the Noble Lord with respect to Bristol and the absence of any satisfactory explanations made it in cumbent on him, as the representative of Bristol, to rise in his place, and protest against the conduct that had been pur sued in the case of Bristol.--(Cheers.) He felt it necessary to allude to what had taken place in the case of Mr. Alderman Daniel. He had hoped that the Noble Lord would have been able to give some satisfactory, or something approaching to a satisfactory, explanation on this point. The Noble Lord had stated that he objected to Alderman Daniel not on account of politics, but because he was too old to discharge the functions of a magistrate in so extensive a place as Bristol. Now, what were the facts? Mr. Alderman Daniel had been chosen by the Corporation to be mayor of Bristol ; that appointment was received with general satisfaction ; and had not been car ried into effect merely because he himself had declared his own resolution to retire.—(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) Now, to be chosen as mayor over a population of 104,000 per sons was no proof of the unfitness of a gentleman to discharge magisterial functions. Mr. Alderman Daniel had been called the father of the corporate body in Bristol, and he could only look upon the refusal of the Noble Lord to confirm his ap pointment as an evidence of the resolution of the Noble Lord to mark him out as one of those who were to be visited with the vengeance of the Government for having always consis tently pursued a certain line of political conduct.—( Cheers.) The Noble Lord could not deny that he was in communication with individuals connected with Bristol. The Noble Lord could not deny that he had communicated with the officers of a Liberal Association in Bristol.—( Cheers.) He had given them no reason why be had selected twelve persons of Liberal poli tics and rejected six persons of Tory politics. He had objected to the appointment of Alderman Daniel in Bristol on the ground of his being too old, but whilst he made this objection to a gentleman in Bristol on the score of age he had appointed an individual in Norwich who was 83 years of age.—( Loud and continued cheering.) When Alderman Daniel's appointment was refused, Mr. Frith was elected without any opposition : such was the feeling produced in Bristol by the refusal to appoint Mr. Daniel ; and Mr. Frith, owing to this, was unanimously elected. He was well aware that to the present Government, and to the Government of 1832, the magistrates of Bristol were obnoxious, and that that feeling still operated. In 1832, the year after the riots, the Government prosecuted the magistrates of Bristol, and a spe cial verdict was returned to the charges made against the mayor.__( Hear, hear.) In 1834 when Lord Melbourne re ceived a deputation (in Derby he observed it was) who went to offer him an address of condolence upon his loss of office, that Noble Lord took the occasion to explain the measures of Reform that were contemplated by his Government, and amongst other propositions he mentioned the reform of Mu nicipal Corporations, which he stated he feared was rendered necessary by the conduct of the Bristol magistrates.—( Re -iterated cheering from the Opposition.) This was the lan guage which the Noble Viscount had thought fit to use to wards those individuals after they had been acquitted by a jury of their countrymen.—(Loud cheers.) As a Representative of Bristol, he felt it incumbent on him to rise and protest against the course which the Noble Lord had pursued towards the Corporation of that city. The Hon. Gentleman then pro ceeded to allude to the opinions expressed in the Report of the Commissioners respecting the Magistracy appointed un der the former Corporate system. Vs hen he had heard that the Noble Lord hesitated about the appointment of those named in the list, he was certain that the Noble Lord in any decision he might make would subject himself to some sacrifice of his partialities, and instead of those three objected to by the Common Council have appointeckhree of the six whom he rejected, and thus have made something like a compromise ; but instead of that he appointed the three persons objected to, and rejected the six to whom no objection whatever had been made.—( Loud cheering.) He himself would have brought the case before the House of Commons before, but that he anticipated that events would occur which, by a chain of cir cumstantial evidence, would convict the Noble Lord of having been actuated by corrupt motives.—( Loud cheers.) He did not shrink from the assertion, that any Minister of the Crown who advised appointments to be made by the Crown with any view to the advancement of party objects was open to the charge of corrupt motives.—( Hear, hear.) He did think that circumstances would yet prove that the Noble Lord had stronger reasons for the course he had pursued than those he had stated to the House. The circumstances proved that the course adopted by the Noble Lord showed that the exercise of the power vested in the Crown had not been pro ductive of the intended effect. So far was lie ( Sir R. Vyvyan) from wishing to vest additional power in the Crown, that he, the other day, on the motion of the Noble Lord the Member for South Lancashire, purposely abstained from voting, be cause he was in principle opposed to take away power from the people to vest it in the Crown.—( Hear, hear.) He had, in the present instance, a proof of the co rr e ct ness of th e principle upon which he acted, and of the propriety of not trusting any Administration with too much power. Bristol was a case in point. Here the people were just, and the Crown was unjust. Of course, in using the word, he spoke of his Majesty's responsible Ministers; who had, in this in stance, acted in the spirit of partisanship. The Noble Lord had said that he did not derive the information upon which the magistrates of Bristol had been appointed through any parti cular channel. The appointments themselves were likely to tell through what channel the information was derived; but as the Noble Lord had said it was not got through any par ticular channel, he ( Sir R. Vyvyan) was bound to believe him.—( Hear, hear.) But, certainly, if the information was not received from a particular party the appointments were very remarkable. He would ask the Noble Lord to state the names of those who had objected to the persons recommended by the town council of Bristol,—('t No, no," from the Minis terial benches.) If secret objections from Bristol were listened to against the recommendation of the council, was it not fair to demand a full opportunity of ascertaining their validity ? Mr. RICHARDS admired extremely the economic feeling of the Hon. Member for Liverpool in relation to the time of the public. He (Mr. Richards) had scarcely spoken this session, whilst no member consumed more of the time of the House, and to very little purpose, than the Hon. Mem ber for Liverpool, who hail spoken ad nauseam ( Hear, hear,)----and perhaps in a way not strictly consistent with the rules which the Noble Lord had himself laid down.— ( Hear. ) Dr. LUSHINGTON had listened very attentively to the debate, and also to the diverting speech of the Hon. Member for Knaresborough, and he quite agreed in his concluding statement, that he did not, when he rose, intend to speak to the question. He congratulated the Hon. Member upon his rigid adherence to his resolution. He coincided with the Speaker in the view which he had taken of the Hon. Baronet's speech. Ho did not understand the Hon. Baronet to impute to the Secretary of State for the Home Department any cor rupt motives; but he agreed with the Speaker that the charge reade was one of a very grave nature, one which, as a Member of Parliament, it was perfectly competent to the Hon. Baronet to prefer, and one, indeed, which it was his duty to prefer, if he had information to sustain it. The charge was, as he under a;ood 1!, thus—that the Noble Lord had exercised the discre ilyi ifi,i e fecd in him as Secretary of State - for the Home DerartiVg do officer peculia ly charged with the pure ad ministration of jusl'ces fur corrupt and party purposes, and for the advancement of pets interests. The Hon. Mem ber distinctly charged the Nobie Lord with corl.:yti". Now he would ask the Right Honourable ilafoeat was L"' prepared to substantiate the charge, or would he Yetract it He would wait for his answer.—( Hear, hear.) (The Hon. Member paused, and Sir R. Vyvyan remained silent.] The Hon. flacon& was, he perceived, silent. What feelings must lie bare of justice? What inure he think of the opinion of the country Wlrat must be his raytiarnt of character when he could advance stieh iert accusation, and afterwards decline to produce evidence of it ? 'What was the substance of his allegation ? Why, that certain narriesii which were transmitted to the Secretary of State were passed by and others substi tuted, and on this circumstance he thought fit to impute cor ruption to his Noble Friend while discharging a meit solemn duty in the administration of justice, as if he had polluted justice at its very source, for party purposes. What will the Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) think of such an act? Will the House bear such an attack as this, after the author perseveres in his silence—silence that argues his inabi lity to substantiate the charge ?—( Cheers from the Ministerial side.) Let the country after this know the Hon. Baronet's sense of justice. Mr. W YNN said, by the explanation which the Hon. Ba ronet gave of the words, and the fact that the Noble Lord was not charged in his private capacity with any deviation from purity of conduct, but he was charged in his public capacity with certain improper acts, it was quite clear that the House could not interfere, and that beyond that the explanation could not be carried. The words could not be taken in a personal sense.—(" Hear, bear," from the Opposition, and a laugh from Mr. O'Connell.) This pacific view of the case might pro voke the risibility of the Member for Dublin, but he would not be deterred by his jocularity from using his best endea vours to prevent consequences that the Hon. Member seemed to treat so lightly.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) Mr. O'CONICIELt —No one deserie'd less the censure of the Right Hon. Gentleman, or cared less for it, than he did. —(Cheers from the Ministerial side.) The fact was, he laughed at an observation of an Hon. Member near him.— (Oh, oh from the Opposition.) He ought to laugh at the Right Hon. Gentleman, but he did not.—(Cheers from the Ministerial side, and general confusion for some minutes. ) Mr. WYNN would take the observations of the Hon. Gen tleman, and the cheers of his followers, as a panegyric, and he wished the Gentlemen opposite joy of their good opinion of him.—( Cheers and laughter from the Opposition.) He (Mr. Wynn) never was in the habit of exciting acrimonious feelings, or using provoking and unwarrantable words ; and if he did, he had no vow registered in Heaven as a shield under which to sktlk from the consequences.—( Loud and protracted cheer ing from the Opposition.) Be the charge right or wrong, it was brought against the Noble Lord in his capacity as a public functionary. The statement he made was the only way of supporting his charge. He thought the explanation of the Hon. Member should be considered perfectly satisfactory. It was not his intention evidently to impute bad motives to him as a private man, and it was only on such grounds that the question could be taken up personally. Considering all these circumstances, he was fully of opinion that this part of the question should be dropped.—( Cheers. ) The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would beg to call the attention of the Hon. Baronet (Sir R. Vyvyan) to a distinction that it was fair to draw. If the words applied to a plain Member of Parliament in his indivi dual capacity, then they would be disorderly, and deserve to be noticed. But when the applied to a Minister of the Crown in his official capacity they were not personal ; and the orders of the House were beside the question now at issue between the Noble Lord and Hon. Baronet, for the charge involved the character of the Ministers of the Crown. The Hon. Baronet did scarcely state every thing that was satis faCtory in his preliminary explanation. If he contented him self with stating that the Noble Lord in these appointments did his best for the interest of his party there could be no ob jection to that. The Right Hon. Baronet certainly was mainly instrumental in keeping his party bound together, and by his exertions he contributed to bind them to himself. He (Mr. Rice) and those who sat beside him were at first delighted with the explanation given; but when the Hon. Baronet subjoined that he retracted nothing, then the charge assumed a new aspect, for it then became a serious accusation against g Minister of the Crown, imputing to him corruption. How could his Noble Friend face his Sovereign, or the country, or that House, if, without dealing with it personally, he did not challenge the Hon. Gentleman to the proof, and give the most unqualified contradiction to the charge?— ' ( Cheers from the Ministerial side.) He claimed for his Noble Friend a right to deny Ole charge, though he did it not as a personal one ; and he hoped the Hon. Baronet, for whom he (Mr. S. Rice), entertained the highest respect, would con sider it fairly, in the general nattze of an imputation against the Government, and either bring foiward proof, or honour ably retract it.—( Hear from the Miniateria side.) The Hon. Baronet, he must say, overlooked the real features of the Bristol case, on which the Noble Lord rested theexpressed disinclination of Alderman Daniel to serve. This taPt was given in evidence before the Committee of the Hous of Commons. He hoped the Hou. Gentleman would see theo was no foundation for the charge brought unjust the Noble Lord in the case of Bristol. He only omitted six names, arid he averred that he had no other alternative left than to pursue the course he did. In the borough of Cambridge the number of persons returned to the Home Office was greater than those appointed ; many were necessarily rejected. Several Hon. Members, the Member for Leicester, for instance, had com municated with the Noble Lord respecting the appointment of magistrates, and they had no grounds of complaint against his selections. If any grounds for complaint existed they did not rest with the Government, .which was always open to re monstrance ; but with - Gentlemen who held them back and came down to the House to publish them.—(Hear, hear, from the Ministerial side, and Oh, oh, from the Opposition.) The charge implied a political crime, not a personal one, and it was a duty which a Minister owed to the King, to himself, and country, to contradict it, and the Hon. Baronet was equally bound to retract the charge if he could not substan tially prove it to be true. He was sure the Hon. Gentleman would not object to the admission that the words were incon siderately used. Lord SANDON said that the real question was an accu sation against a Minister of the Crown in his official capacity, and it was the first time lie ever heard that a Member of Par liament who explained should be required to do more than state the reasons for his bringing the charge.—(Cheers from the Opposition.) If a gentleman charged a Minister with an improper exercise of his power, and stated the grounds of his accusation, it was bearing down the freedom and privi leges of Parliament to call on him to retract. What was the charge of his Hon. Friend ? Why, that Government, in the election to magisterial office, just did what their own partisans said they ought to do. Their constant inculcation was, that they should appoint men of their own party.—( Opposition cheering.) Sir R. Vyvyan said he thought this a corrupt practice. The supporters of Government said Government ought to do so. The preference to their own partisans was not a novel feature in the conduct of Gentlemen opposite ; they said that Lord Grey and,others did so. The Gentlemen opposite should not blow hot and cold at the same time ; let it be distinctly stated and understood on what principle Go vernment patronage is to be exercised, whether partisanship, or even justice and respect for character. Is political partia lity or fair dealing to be the rule of action—are they to be guided by character, or their politics ?—( Renewed cheers from the Opposition.) What could he expect from the con duct of the Government when it was found that they super seded the advice of the Lord Lieutenant ? Oh, but it was urged that the magistrates were all Tory, because the Lords Lieutenant arc Tory. Well, but if the magistrates are Tory, what are the gentry from whom the magistrates should fitly be selected ? Are not the majority of them Tory ?—(Loud cheers from the Opposition.) An Honourable Member cried " No." Ha (Lord Sandon) said " Yes," and that Gentle man's party knew it well.—(" Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") The Edinburgh Review, and their other leading organs, ad mitted the fact with regret. The Noble Lord referred to Liverpool. In the case of Liverpool, a high arid reluctant' tribute was paid to the Conservative party there ; for when a list of magistrates, all of one side of politics, the Ministerial side, was sent up to Government, it was food so objectionable that it was sent back with a demand for other and more re spectable names.—( Hear, hear.) If they grantea new Mu nicipal Corporations to Ireland. considering the disorgaL7ed state of that country, what sort of magistrates, lie would ask, could be expected from the new municipal bodies there ? ( Cheers.) It was somewhat peculiar that all the cases that had been heard of the alteration of the lists had been in favour of Whig politics. They had never in one case made an al teration asainst themselves. When the balance was on their side they kept it, but when it was on the other it was altered. He considered that the rejection or acceptation of a name or. political grounds was decidedly corrupt. As to the talk about impeachment, he thought it commenced from a desire to give undue importance to the subject, and divert the attention of the House and the country from the main feature in debate. He did not expect to hear a lecture read to that House by the Hon. and Learned Member for the Tower Hamlets on the subject, who had never been particularly mealy-mouthed in the choice of his language to political opponents. Mr. C. WOOD thought the expression should be retracted. Mr. T. DUNCOMIIE thought that when he first heard that a charge was to be brought forward that the Noble Lord had contravened some Act of Parliament, or been mixed up with some dirt] work in the borough of Poole—(Laughter)— but he found that there were no such enormity to be brought against him, and that lie had been guilty of nothing but re fusing to appoint to the magistracy a superannuated old Tory.—( Hear, hear.) If he might be allowed he would take that opportunity of giving a word of advice to the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth. Ile had said t h a t, according as persons voted at an election, he should judge them to be Whig. or Radical. Now, he would advise the Right Hon. Baronet not to adopt any such standard, and lie would instance as an illustration of its erroneous tendency the case of the Hon. Gentleman the Member for Knares borough. If he looked over the poll books he would find that the constituents of the Hon. Member were four-fifths Radicals, and that the principles the Hon. Member had ad vocated on the hustings were Radical, which caused his return to that House.—( Hear.) With regard to the motion now 'before the House, lie thought it a most extraordinary one, and could only have been brought forward as a sop to the old Cor porations. The Corporations may have said, " Why did you not make a better fight for us? See what a fight they made t the Hobs of Lords;" and by way of amends, and appeas -. I r!,~ ;~ ing those who thus reproached them, this nlight be only an. at- tempt to push in a few magistrates of the old Corporations. In conclusion, he hoped the Noble Lord would persevere making liberal appointments. Mr. RICHARDS denied that he had been returned on Radical principles, and would appeal to his Hon. Colleague ) whether he had not always repudiated them,,-, Hp / Was forth* " 1 " sort of Reform which was advocated by the - Right Igu. 'Da ronet the Member for Tamworth, and not for tliciselorganic reforms which would inevitably lead to revolution, anarchy. and bloodshed.—( Cheering and laughter from the Ministerial. side of the House.) Mr. DUNCOM BE expressed his willingness to retract, if the Hon. Colleague of the Member for Knaresborough wou ld say : . hat his votes in that House were not inconsistent with this pyr n easiu :tis made to his constituents on the hustings. M r , incART rose, but could not be heard for a short time,. in consequence of the loud cries for Mr. Lawson, the colleague of Mr. Richards, which subsiding without Mr. Lawson rising, the Hon. Gentleman roceeded to say that the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Bristol, vw.ls. b.-ought as an honest man, to sub stantiate the charge he had .-ought against the Noble Lord. If the charge, however, was true, it was only following the ex ple which had been set for years 13 . ) - the Tories.—(Cheers.)) The Hon. Member then stated, that upon the entrance of the Duke of Wellington into office, and during the interregnum, seven Tory Magistrates had been appointed to the borough of Bristol. Mr. C. W. WYNN rose to explain. There were no Ma gistrates appointed to the borough ; there were to the county. He, at the period alluded to, held the office of Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. He received intimation that Magis trates were wanted for the county, but declined to give any answer upon the subject until the list had been laid before the Earl of Derby, the Lord Lieutenant of the County, when the whole were appointed. Mr. E WART said that the Right Hon. Gentleman did not disprove the correctness of his opinion. After a remark from Lord SANDON, which did not reach us, Mr. ROEBUCK said, that since he had been in that House, he had eetoed to feel anything like astonishment at what oc curred ; but he had not been sufficiently accustomed to its proceedings to hem , without surprise the hardened audacity of the statements of that evening. The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, atler passing a long life based upon the system of exclusion, in a Zudden fit of virtue, became the champion of equal justice.—(Cheers from the Ministerial benches.) When justice was plat'ed in the hands of the people, he began to ask what political Party the magistrates belonged to. Why, it was notorious, that ( Luring the continua tion of the Right Hon. Baronet's party in obi.'!e, the appoint ments were all along on political grounds. Was not the pre sent inquiry sheer hypocrisy and pretence, seeing that they had been in the constant habit of appointing political magistrates? Accustomed, he must repeat, as he had been to the proceed ings of that House, he was not prepared for this pretence and audacity. The fact was, that the time of Tory domination was fleeting away, and that was the cause of the preseut outcry. There might be three Whigs for one Tory in a bo rough, but if they looked over the list of magistrates in the county, they would find forty of the Tory party, and of the other none at all.—( Cheers from the Ministerial side of the House.) And why did this pass unnoticed ? Because it would not suit a party purpose. And who were they that now charged the Noble Lord with being a political partisan? Why, in God's name, let the House look back, and it would see that it was that very party—that dominant party—which they had only lately beaten down.—( Hear, hear.) But what was the case? A majority had been chosen—a large majority—of Liberals in the magistracy. Were they to search about and ascertain who was Tory and who Whig ? No such thing. They should see who would best do justice to the people. The Right Hon. Baronet opposite (Sir R. Peel) had been called, and to a certain extent, an enlightened statesman ; and had he not said that the people should not only have justice but have what they believed to be justice ? And had he been able to point out any case where justice was likely not to be impartially administered ; and if he has not, what is this charge but one of sheer pretence ? He knew well enough that the people of England would see through the fallacy— that it was only fitted for the temperature of that House—and only for half of it. The Noble Lord (the Home Secretary) had acted in the same way that the Right Hon. Baronet had acted when in office. He inquired whether the cha racter of the magistrate nominated was unimpeachable, whether he was fit to fill the office, and required that he should not be opposed to the Government. He (Mr. Roebuck) was now quite sure the Noble Lord had done his duty to the country in regard to the magistrates, because of the vituperation with which he was assailed from the other side of the House. The moment he did what was right, that moment, it was evident, he gave unforgiveable offence to Hon. Gentlemen opposite. The moment they began int praise and laudation of the Noble Lord, or his measures, that moment he (Mr. Roebuck) knew there was mischief going on, and that all was not right.—( A laugh.) As the entire evening had been spent in hearing vituperation—( Hear and laughter)—from the Opposition—(Haer, and renewed laugh ter)—he (Mr. Roebuck) was perfectly satisfied that the Noble Lord against whom it was all directed had done his duty, and, moreover, he was sure that, having done so, he had gained the good will of the people of England. The great ground of that Right Hon. Gentleman's complaint was, that the people had now the appointment of the magistracy, and that those they chose were not to his wish. That was the sub stantial ground of the Right Hon. Gentleman's complaint. But that was just the reason why they should be acceptable to the people of England, and why the Noble Lord was jus- Oed in assenting to them. The Noble Lord had confirmed t h e choice of the people. That was his crime in the eyes of the Ri l cht Hon. Baronet. The principle of popular controul had often before been attacked in that House by the Right Hon. Barone: ; but it had never been overturned, though often defeated. Nett,ing free from popular control remained long free from vice. It 'Was for that reason he (Mr. Roebuck) would fain introduce popular control in all cases. He would have the bench unpolluted by partisans, the court cleared of politi c it the judgment-seat uncontaminated with fawn ing magistrates, ,and the stream of justice uncorrupted at its source. By no other means than popular control, could these great objects be effected. Sir R. PEEL—I rise, Sir, in explanation of what has fallen from the Hon. Member respectii:g me.—(" Hear," and cries of " Order," and " Spoke.") I shall confine myself to explanation. One: part of the Hon. Gentleman's speech is entirely inconsistent with the fact.—(Cheer;.) Another part is founded on a gross misrepresentation of what fell from me —( Cheers)—and the remainder exhibits as strong an instance and as flagrant a proof of that hypocrisy and simulated love of justice—(Cheers, and cries of " Order," with considerable confusion.) Mr. ROEBUCK rose to order—He trusted that if the Right Hon. Baronet was permitted to make a speech attack ing him, he should be allowed the privilege of reply.—( Cries of" Order.") _ Sir R. PEEL—As flagrant a proof of that hypocrisy and simulated love of justice as I have ever seen, or heard adduced before in this House.—( Loud cheers.) Mr. GROTE rose to order. He wished it to be understood that if a power of attack was conceded to the Right Hon. Bart. opposite, a right of reply should also be granted to his Hou. Friend the Member for Bath. —( Hear. ) The SPE AK ER said that, •in strictness,*no Hon. Member had a right to speak more than once in the same debate, except the member who should open it ; but it was for the House to decide in all cases concerning its own regulations. Sir HENRY HARDINGE said that the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last had accused his Right Hon. Friend of being actuated by motives of hypocrisy. His Right Honourable Friend had, therefore, a right to repel that accusation and justify himself.—(Hear.) Sir R. PEEL—If the Hon. Gentleman - chooses to claim the right of reply to anything which I have said, or shall say, I shall be the last man in the House to deny it him. The lion. Gentleman stated that I spent the whole time which passed while I held the office of Secretary of State for the Home Department in making judicial appointments for party and political purposes. I deny, utterly and wholly deny, that I did so.—(Cheers.) Dr. I.IfSHINGTON rose to order. The Hon. and Learned Member was not, however, audible in the Gallery. He was understood to object to the Right Hon. Baronet's en tertaining the attacks made on him, as being irrelevant to the question before the House. Mr. C. W. WYNN said that in all matters personal to Hon. Members, or which involved a charge against them, it was usual for the House to indulge the individual so circum stanced with the opportunity of justifying himself, however widely he might depart from the question in debate.---( Hear. ) Sir R. PEEL—It must entirely rest with the pleasure of the House whether I be permitted to proceed, or whether it will enforce its standing order in this instance more rigidly than is usual on such occasions. —(Cheers.) But I must say tha , .in my experience of its proceedings, I have rarely heard a speechsuch vituperation as that of the Hon. Gentleman -ssed to any other Hon. Memb er , w ithout al so opposite, addr, "scion to answer it follow.—( Hear.) I witnessing the peri2 shall trespass on the atte.: tion of the House for as short a time as possible, and shall confine myself strictly to explanation of the charges urged against me.—(Z. ear.) The Hon. Gentle man said that, as Secretary of State fortLc Home Department, I had, during the whole period of my continuance in office, made the power of his Majesty in judicial appointments con fided to me subservient to party and political purposes. I deny it—utterly deny it.—(Cheers.) I never made any ju dicial appointment for party or political purposes.,—( Cheers. ) Nay more, I always refused to interfere when such grounds ad were alleged in favour of a candidate.—(Hear, hear.) • !, while in office, repeated applications from Members of Parliament who supported the Administration of which formed a part, to appoint their friends, because they west favourable to our opinions, but 'I always denied that that was a valid ground of recommendation, and I uniformly declined to interfere for them.—(Loud cheek) It is well known that the judicial appointments rest, not with the Se cretary of State, but with the Lord Chancellor ; but I declare that I never in any instance made use of the influence which my connection with that high functionary as a member of the Government might give me to obtain an appointment to any judicial situation on the grounds charged against me by the Hon. Gentleman.—( Cheers.) So much for the first part of the Hon. Gentleman's speech, which I stat e d to b e ent i re l y in consistent with the fact, and which I hop e I h ave prove d to h e so to the satisfaction of the House.—(llear, hear.) I said that another part of the Hon. Gentleman's observations was founded in gross misrepresentation of what fell from me in the debate—l proceed to prove i t . T he Mi n . G ent l eman sa id that my only complaint was that- the poeple had the power of choosing their own magistracy, and that they had not chosen them according to my wish. That was a misrepresen tation of what I had said. What I had stated on that occa sion was, that when the people exercised the power given them in the selection of magistrates on Conservative principles, the full weight was not given to their recommendation and 11 •